Why are there obvious muppets as main characters? Is this a Sci-Fi show or a puppet show?
If you were Brian Henson (you, uh, may have heard of his dad?), you'd probably have some Muppets in your cast too. Personally, I found it a nice break from the "guy with some shit glued on his forehead" formula most other series take.
Why is one of them farting an on-going joke? Is this Terence and Phillip? The plot justification: when angry, or scared, Hynerians like Rygel fart helium. Look, we all have our personal problems.
The storytelling justification: 1) To illustrate that different species have some very odd dissimilarities. 2) Because although the show could be Very Serious Indeed, the writers demonstrated repeatedly that they didn't take themselves too seriously. 3) Because fart jokes are funny. You don't want to admit it, but they are. Deal.
Farscape is one of those shows that's very difficult to break into because of its highly seralized nature. That is to say, the plotline is very involved, and trying to break into it is very difficult. ("Who is that guy? Why are they all looking at each other uncomfortably? Why the musical sting?") It got to the point where the "previously, on Farscape" section at the beginning of every episode packed in more story than most of the actual episode.
With that in mind, Farscape rewarded loyal viewers with a story that was incredibly involved and detailed (think: Babylon 5), coupled with character interactions that seemed effortlessly natural (think: completely unlike Babylon 5). I first started watching partway through season two. I'd just sorta left the TV on the Sci Fi channel (a mistake I very rarely make these days), and the conversation between my wife and I just sorta drifted off as we watched an episode called "The Way We Weren't," which remains my favorite episode to this day. It was about shame, and betrayal, and forgiveness: most importantly, it was about these things in a way which seemed to assume the best about its audience, rather than the worst. My wife, who generally dislikes space-opera style sci-fi, became a rabid viewer, as did I.
Anyway, watch a few episodes with an open mind and a sense of humor, and you're likely to be surprised with where it takes you.
Sure they can survive in a world without information boundaries. Where they can't survive is in a world without buzzwords and marketing bs. "world without information boundaries" my ass.
Jeez, Pedro. Unless you disenfranchise your information boundries, how can you ever hope to leverage your knowledge resources in a dynamic way to effect optimal... uh...
(shit. let me find my brochure. oh - here it is.)...to effect optimal return on your brain-market capitalization?
Fundamental concerns in India include the ongoing dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir, massive overpopulation, environmental degradation, extensive poverty, and ethnic and religious strife... Population below poverty line: 25%
Compare with the US, with a poverty rate at about half that (12.7%).
And, in answer to the question you posed elsewhere in this thread: yes, I absolutely, one-hundred-percent, feel safer in the US from threat of terrorism than I would in India.
Your own quote contradicts you. "If you do not purchase Software assurance within 30 days of purchasing your new Microsoft product, you will need to purchase an entirely new license when you upgrade." This is exactly what the previous poster was saying: you pony up for what amounts to "upgrade insurance" up front, or you resolve to pay the full price for the new version when it comes out.
Obviously, nobody is saying they couldn't pay full price for the product when it comes out. What they're saying is that they paid money up front so that they wouldn't have to, and are now finding out that it didn't do them any good.
As for his reasons for blaming Microsoft: MS made two claims. The first was that "the new version of our product will be available on X date." The second was that the CIO would be covered under the SA agreement for the cost of the upgrades. The first wasn't true, and because of that, the second wasn't true. Blame the CIO for believing Microsoft if you want, but you certainly can't claim that they got what they were promised.
Two days ago, I upgraded our mail server from Debian/Stable to Debian/Testing. In the process, I installed the nicely packagized version of exim4-daemon-heavy, which includes the exiscan patch.
Yesterday morning, one of my coworkers (a network engineer) apologized to me for being over quota, and promised he'd remove some mail soon. I blinked - I hadn't instituted mail quotas. Turned out he'd received a virus disguising itself as a system "over quota" message. The virus was hidden in a password protected zip (which Sophos for libc6 on Linux did not catch). And, since I'd just upgraded a boatload of software, it took a little while for either of us to figure out that the message was completely bogus.
Never doubt that a little chaos can cause otherwise highly competent people to act like morons.
Easy there, guy. Motorola is just announcing the new chips today. I'd guess you have at least a couple months before Apple announces a new PowerBook model, and a month or two after that before they ship.
(I speak advisedly: I'm typing this from a TiBook purchased in May of 2003, about 4 months before the shiny 15" AlBook you're using was announced.)
Clearly, if this was a problem for you, you weren't paying adequate attention to the GM's guidelines.
The first guideline: KILL THE BASTARDS. (that is, the players). If you were overly swamped by notes from the players, the appropriate response would be to discourage further notes through the judicious application of death. Commies.
This isn't, strictly speaking, an ad hominem attack.
"Ad hominem" refers to a form of logical fallacy where you attempt to discredit the person making an argument, instead of the argument they actually made. Had Phipps simply said, "ESR is a doo-doo head, and therefore his argument holds no water," it would be one thing.
However, that's not what happened. Phipps spent some time pointing out specific problems with Raymond's analysis. They are (paraphrased, and without critical analysis):
Raymond takes McNealy's comments out of context.
Raymond fails to note important contributions made to open source by Sun
Raymond makes an ill-advised comparison between Perl and Java
Raymond misstates Sun's control over the Java programming language
Regardless of your opinion of the merits of Phipp's analysis, it certainly rises above the level of "tree hugger," or "communist," two epithets which would be ridiculously applied to ESR, an avowed gun-nut and libertarian. In fact, other than referring to him as "out of touch," I don't see a single negative statement regarding Eric Raymond personally in the article.
But hey, way to go with your sly anti-businessman attack. Because as everyone knows, MBAs are all simpletons and schoolyard bullies.
Well put. I'm not really trying to make the argument that the market capitalization is a good metric for determining the success of a company. Rather, I meant that ESR's statement about share price is completely nonsensical: to use the geek terminology, you might say that my version is false, but his isn't even well formed.
I asked a friend who works in the stock market to evaluate my statement, and he responded with the following explanation (paraphrased):
Let's say I issue two shares of your mom for $150 apiece. That doesn't mean that your mom is now worth more than IBM. I've just set a (probably too high) barrier of entry to your mom, leaving your mom's pricing ripe for a stock split.
I'm not sure that bears at all on this particular conversation, but I laughed until soda came out of my nose, so I felt it worth mentioning.
Open source is hardly a zero-revenue model; ask Red Hat, which had a share price over triple Sun's when I just checked.
I'm not an economist, or a stockbroker. And yet, even I know the difference between share price and market capitalization.
Number of shares outstanding of RedHat (RHAT) stock: 1.7 million, according to their investor's FAQ.
Number of shares outstanding of Sun Microsystems (SUNW): 3.236 billion, according to their investor's FAQ.
Market capitalization of Red Hat, based on a stock price of $18.31 per share: about $31 million.
Market capitalization of Sun Microsystems, based on a stock price of $5.6 dollars per share: about $18.26 billion.
There are good business reasons for open sourcing Java, but saying, "One day, you may be as successful as a company with one-onethousandth of your total market value!" probably isn't the best way to convince them.
1. What role do you think peer-to-peer encryption will play in the p2p sharing networks of the future?
2. Did you know that you have the same first name as Bram Stoker, the author of "Dracula"?
3. To what degree do you think having "identity verification" (that is, verification of the nodes on a p2p network) is valuable in building reliable networks?
4. Isn't Dracula cool?
5. Who do you think would win in a fight - Dracula or Wolfman?
Slashdot Mirror
Okay. In order:
Why are there obvious muppets as main characters? Is this a Sci-Fi show or a puppet show?
If you were Brian Henson (you, uh, may have heard of his dad?), you'd probably have some Muppets in your cast too. Personally, I found it a nice break from the "guy with some shit glued on his forehead" formula most other series take.
Why is one of them farting an on-going joke? Is this Terence and Phillip?
The plot justification: when angry, or scared, Hynerians like Rygel fart helium. Look, we all have our personal problems.
The storytelling justification: 1) To illustrate that different species have some very odd dissimilarities. 2) Because although the show could be Very Serious Indeed, the writers demonstrated repeatedly that they didn't take themselves too seriously. 3) Because fart jokes are funny. You don't want to admit it, but they are. Deal.
Farscape is one of those shows that's very difficult to break into because of its highly seralized nature. That is to say, the plotline is very involved, and trying to break into it is very difficult. ("Who is that guy? Why are they all looking at each other uncomfortably? Why the musical sting?") It got to the point where the "previously, on Farscape" section at the beginning of every episode packed in more story than most of the actual episode.
With that in mind, Farscape rewarded loyal viewers with a story that was incredibly involved and detailed (think: Babylon 5), coupled with character interactions that seemed effortlessly natural (think: completely unlike Babylon 5). I first started watching partway through season two. I'd just sorta left the TV on the Sci Fi channel (a mistake I very rarely make these days), and the conversation between my wife and I just sorta drifted off as we watched an episode called "The Way We Weren't," which remains my favorite episode to this day. It was about shame, and betrayal, and forgiveness: most importantly, it was about these things in a way which seemed to assume the best about its audience, rather than the worst. My wife, who generally dislikes space-opera style sci-fi, became a rabid viewer, as did I.
Anyway, watch a few episodes with an open mind and a sense of humor, and you're likely to be surprised with where it takes you.
...that bike would chew you up and spit you out!
(Also: wow. Nice.)
Only the true Messiah denies h... nevermind.
That was easy. You signed the original post. ;)
Jeez, Pedro. Unless you disenfranchise your information boundries, how can you ever hope to leverage your knowledge resources in a dynamic way to effect optimal... uh...
(shit. let me find my brochure. oh - here it is.)
And thus, the difference between data and synthesis was illustrated.
Brilliant. :)
Better, but let me try a third analogy:
"We wouldn't have to spend so much money making our roads perfect if we weren't all driving around on bald tires."
That gets, I think, to the heart of the issue - that people blame the road for problems that might be better addressed by looking at the cars.
From India's entry in the CIA Factbook:
Compare with the US, with a poverty rate at about half that (12.7%).
But hey, lighten up. It's not like India has a signifigant problem with terrorism or anything, right?
And, in answer to the question you posed elsewhere in this thread: yes, I absolutely, one-hundred-percent, feel safer in the US from threat of terrorism than I would in India.
Your own quote contradicts you. "If you do not purchase Software assurance within 30 days of purchasing your new Microsoft product, you will need to purchase an entirely new license when you upgrade." This is exactly what the previous poster was saying: you pony up for what amounts to "upgrade insurance" up front, or you resolve to pay the full price for the new version when it comes out.
Obviously, nobody is saying they couldn't pay full price for the product when it comes out. What they're saying is that they paid money up front so that they wouldn't have to, and are now finding out that it didn't do them any good.
As for his reasons for blaming Microsoft: MS made two claims. The first was that "the new version of our product will be available on X date." The second was that the CIO would be covered under the SA agreement for the cost of the upgrades. The first wasn't true, and because of that, the second wasn't true. Blame the CIO for believing Microsoft if you want, but you certainly can't claim that they got what they were promised.
Wired ran an article on this guy a couple of weeks ago. So, if you wondering why this sounds familiar, now you know.
Step one: go to a computer with a flash player installed.
Step two: check out these. Or for giggles, maybe a couple of these. Or maybe just This.
Step three: tell me again that Flash is pointless.
Two days ago, I upgraded our mail server from Debian/Stable to Debian/Testing. In the process, I installed the nicely packagized version of exim4-daemon-heavy, which includes the exiscan patch.
Yesterday morning, one of my coworkers (a network engineer) apologized to me for being over quota, and promised he'd remove some mail soon. I blinked - I hadn't instituted mail quotas. Turned out he'd received a virus disguising itself as a system "over quota" message. The virus was hidden in a password protected zip (which Sophos for libc6 on Linux did not catch). And, since I'd just upgraded a boatload of software, it took a little while for either of us to figure out that the message was completely bogus.
Never doubt that a little chaos can cause otherwise highly competent people to act like morons.
Apache isn't distributed under the GPL. It's distributed under the Apache Software License (ASL).
After reading the followups here...
Note to self: STOP MAKING JOKES, sammy baby. When nobody can tell you're making a joke, it's usually because you're not funny.
Easy there, guy. Motorola is just announcing the new chips today. I'd guess you have at least a couple months before Apple announces a new PowerBook model, and a month or two after that before they ship.
(I speak advisedly: I'm typing this from a TiBook purchased in May of 2003, about 4 months before the shiny 15" AlBook you're using was announced.)
Whoa! Your PC has an integral mouse? How does that work?
Every PC I've ever used, I had to plug in an external device just to have a mouse at all, let alone a second mouse button!
Clearly, if this was a problem for you, you weren't paying adequate attention to the GM's guidelines.
The first guideline: KILL THE BASTARDS. (that is, the players). If you were overly swamped by notes from the players, the appropriate response would be to discourage further notes through the judicious application of death. Commies.
Good call. I suppose I should have written, "Well, it's an ad hominem argument, but... you know. The good kind."
I wonder if that means I'm guilty of an entirely different logical fallacy.
This isn't, strictly speaking, an ad hominem attack.
"Ad hominem" refers to a form of logical fallacy where you attempt to discredit the person making an argument, instead of the argument they actually made. Had Phipps simply said, "ESR is a doo-doo head, and therefore his argument holds no water," it would be one thing.
However, that's not what happened. Phipps spent some time pointing out specific problems with Raymond's analysis. They are (paraphrased, and without critical analysis):
Regardless of your opinion of the merits of Phipp's analysis, it certainly rises above the level of "tree hugger," or "communist," two epithets which would be ridiculously applied to ESR, an avowed gun-nut and libertarian. In fact, other than referring to him as "out of touch," I don't see a single negative statement regarding Eric Raymond personally in the article.
But hey, way to go with your sly anti-businessman attack. Because as everyone knows, MBAs are all simpletons and schoolyard bullies.
I asked a friend who works in the stock market to evaluate my statement, and he responded with the following explanation (paraphrased):
I'm not sure that bears at all on this particular conversation, but I laughed until soda came out of my nose, so I felt it worth mentioning.
And don't use Windows Update, either, as it requrires an ActiveX control to version-check your installed software.
I'm not an economist, or a stockbroker. And yet, even I know the difference between share price and market capitalization.
Number of shares outstanding of RedHat (RHAT) stock: 1.7 million, according to their investor's FAQ.
Number of shares outstanding of Sun Microsystems (SUNW): 3.236 billion, according to their investor's FAQ.
Market capitalization of Red Hat, based on a stock price of $18.31 per share: about $31 million.
Market capitalization of Sun Microsystems, based on a stock price of $5.6 dollars per share: about $18.26 billion.
There are good business reasons for open sourcing Java, but saying, "One day, you may be as successful as a company with one-onethousandth of your total market value!" probably isn't the best way to convince them.
1. What role do you think peer-to-peer encryption will play in the p2p sharing networks of the future?
2. Did you know that you have the same first name as Bram Stoker, the author of "Dracula"?
3. To what degree do you think having "identity verification" (that is, verification of the nodes on a p2p network) is valuable in building reliable networks?
4. Isn't Dracula cool?
5. Who do you think would win in a fight - Dracula or Wolfman?